Haircuts for climate change?

My iPhone went for a brief inadvertent swim in the Bahamas. Afterwards, it refused to charge due to the detection of water inside the Lightning connector. My companion is a collector of classic English automobiles (he’s Irish so I don’t know why he would want the automotive products of the country that colonized Ireland) and thus has extensive and bitter experience with Lucas electrics. “Use a hair dryer on it,” he suggested.

As I consumed hundreds of watts of power in what turned out to be a successful quest to restore the iPhone to full health, it occurred to me that long hair might be bad for Mother Earth.

Consider that maintaining long hair requires a lot of shampoo and conditioner plus huge energy consumption if blown dry. By contrast, it costs almost no energy to cut hair short.

Greta Thunberg appears with long hair in photos and therefore plainly wearing one’s hair short cannot be a condition of climate sainthood. But why isn’t it?

9 thoughts on “Haircuts for climate change?

  1. Rhetorical? Anything that affects women’s ability to maximize sexual marketplace value is off the environmental table. You know what is really bad for the environment? All the treated sewer water with female hormones from birth control pills. Want a laugh go ask a hippy chick if she will protest against the pill.

  2. An EE Phd would just disassemble it & dry it out with alcohol. Having a mane creates more insulation, reducing heating needs. With so many humans fleeing shitholes near the equator for the only viable economy in the world, Calif*, they need more heat.

  3. Fun quiz. With the energy necessary to heat a given liquid mass of water from 0 C to 100 C (without actually boiling it), how high could you pump that same mass of water (assuming no frictional losses?

    Correct answer by reading the URL in this link

Comments are closed.